Actress Jodie Whittaker succeeds Peter Capaldi, who took the role in 2013 and will leave during this year’s Christmas special and in the process will introduce the world to the first ever female Doctor.

Now I know we’re [GhostbustersNews] going catch some heat for this, but I want to give some insight from someone who stood on the frontlines with regards to managing not only a website about Ghostbusters but several social media accounts before the release of last year’s female-led reboot.

I’ve read and been told (by visitors) time and time again that they believe the actual sexism geared towards ATC was only around 10%, with the majority of fans instead angry with the film being reboot or they didn’t like one particular actress. I’d love to believe that, I REALLY would, but from my experience, I’d venture to say it actually hovers around 25-35%, with another 5-10% in denial.

That's really too bad about the differences in reactions there, although hopefully it won't drop below 65% likes. Hopefully the reaction will be milder. Unfortunately I remember some of the promos for Ghostbusters looked like they may get a positive reaction at first, but then the wave of negativity would come.

While GB:ATC has enough legitimate reasons to dislike it's premise, especially after seeing it, I think the main takeaway from the article is how people underestimated/downplayed the shear initial amount of mysoginist backlash.

Davideverona wrote:This doc Who season will be in continuity and not a full reboot, so I think it will be ok

We're already seeing the usual "feminism is ruining Dr Who!" nonesense. Fandoms will never be OK. They are ill. I don't watch Dr. Who but even if I did, I can't go down this road with a fandom again. I'm tired of it.

I do see some GB fans support the female Doctor...just so they can stick it to ATC one more time. Same with Wonder Woman.

Next to Ghostbusters, Doctor Who is one of my top fandoms, and I am very excited about what this new Doctor will bring to the show. It will be very similar to the Ghostbusters experience, for whenever I'm out in my Doctor costumes (2, 4, 5, or 12), people are going to come up to me and expect that I'll complain with them about the character being a woman.

I don't think this gives any insight. When photos came out for Eccleston's Doctor people complain that the new show was going to be too dark and intense. By the time Matt Smith was picked people were complaining that they were going to make the Doctor younger and younger to attract young fans. Then Capaldi was announced and people were outraged that he was too old. There is always outrage about the Doctor. There was anger towards Torchwood featuring a gay lead. So at this point the fandom has had fights over show intensity, the looks of the actors, the age of the main character (both for being too young and too old) and the sexuality of characters. Gender is far from the first "Why is any one fighting about this?" argument held among Who fans.

As a long time fan I don't care what they do with the Doctor. I've found 2005 onward to be garbage and so far from what the intention of the Franchise was that it's only Doctor Who in name only.

I've simply walked away from Doctor Who because it only took 6 hours to get to the reboot levels of infighting our fandom took 6 months to accomplish. I'm not going through that again. Sadly the ratings have been falling steadily since Matt Smith left which is bad news for starters and shaking 54 years of established lore is going to make it an extremely up hill battle for Chris Chibnall and Jodie Whittaker. If it doesn't work (which could very well be given the already present backlash) then the show gets cancelled (which I don't want) or she only lasts a season, the show reverts back to its previous form with a man in the lead role and the 13th female regeneration becomes a joke moving forward. So there's not really a lot of positive going forward.

If not, you could still dismiss the "woman" thing on a flaw with being granted a second regeneration cycle. I mean, f***...they can re-write just about any "rules" to justify keeping the show going."Who knows what adventures they'll have between now and the time the show becomes unprofitable?"

Doctor Who really stopped for me when they introduced Romana II, so they can do as they please as far as I am concerned.

Last edited by featofstrength on July 17th, 2017, 10:08 am, edited 1 time in total.

Depends on which audience you talk to, FOS. There are alot of new GB fans that exclusively like the reboot and had no interest in the franchise before that who feel like the reboot is better. Same thing is happening in Doctor Who. You have either strictly Nu-Who fans or casual more feminist leaning fans who herald this as the greatest thing ever who may or may not even stick around for the long haul vs long time fans who just want a quality show, understand the 54 year old lore and are worried that the casting will derail the show further. I personally am walking after the Christmas episode. It will end 10 years of the revival series and the 12th Doctor's arc for me. And I don't want to watch the show die a slow death if things go south this season.

I don't know much about the show, but from what everyone tells me, Doctor Who is about being open minded, about variability. It's interesting that so many of its fans aren't taking those lessons to heart. But really, that's true of all fandoms. Rocky Horror for instance, was about shattering social norms, being different. Yet the minute the show broke from tradition with that TV movie, the fans revolted. Fans fear change, even if the story they love celebrates it.

People make fun of "casuals," but frankly, they often have a better grip on what a story's about than the hard cores, who lose all perspective.

JurorNo.2 wrote:I don't know much about the show, but from what everyone tells me, Doctor Who is about being open minded, about variability.

Sometimes..sometimes it's also about karate-chopping monsters and driving hovercrafts.

The Pertwee series got as far as the show needed to go with companions and romantic relationships:

Simple, beautiful, and unmatched...especially compared to that blubbery Rose nonsense.

DarkSpectre wrote: You have either strictly Nu-Who fans or casual more feminist leaning fans who herald this as the greatest thing ever who may or may not even stick around for the long haul vs long time fans who just want a quality show, understand the 54 year old lore and are worried that the casting will derail the show further. I personally am walking after the Christmas episode.

I wonder if they are going to make the 1st Doctor "okay" with all this "woman business" or will he be whisked away before the transformation?Y'know, like when Grandpa has to pass away before your cousin can come out to the family?

featofstrength wrote:Doctor Who really stopped for me when they introduced Romana II, so they can do as they please as far as I am concerned.

That's how I feel. What happened to Doctor Who is now happening to DC shows on CW and Fox. They are being turned into teen dramas with unnecessary romance stories. It all started after Harry Potter got so big. They all want to fight for that tween audience.

DarkSpectre wrote:I personally am walking after the Christmas episode. It will end 10 years of the revival series and the 12th Doctor's arc for me. And I don't want to watch the show die a slow death if things go south this season.

For me what killed the show was recasting the first Doctor. They changed so much about the show and I thought it should have ended long ago. I've argued 2005 on focused too much on romance but I accepted that perhaps regenerations from 2005 on were just extra horny. But they began to change to much history. They don't even do it well. It sounds like terrible fan fiction. But now to bring the first Doctor back to use him as they please is terrible.

It reminds me of what Disney did in destroying the Star Wars history. There isn't any respect for the work done before hand. The revival of Doctor Who started with at least a little bit of respect for the franchise now they are telling us, the fans, we are wrong and they are right. That is fine for new stuff but they are changing things that have been held true for decades and simply cover it up by saying many times "The Doctor was just lying when he said 'XXXXXXX' years ago"

My first introduction to Doctor Who was through my brothers showing me episodes from the 1980s when I was really young, and been a strong fan ever since (I even have a replica of Sylvester McCoy, the 7th Doctor's costume), and have more TARDIS toys than I may be willing to admit to (a compensating response to not having any non-DIY TARDIS toys when I was younger). I was initially a bit conflicted on learning that Jodie Whittaker had been chosen to play the 13th Doctor, but after having a night to sleep on it, I'm happy to accept her as the new owner of the TARDIS. That isn't me wanting to stick it to the fans who've responded with bile and anger (either for the casting decision or Answer The Call), that's me trying to live by the show's idea: times change, as does the Doctor, and that we're better for being open-minded than for being closed-minded and angry.

The show has lasted 54 years on the premise that the titular character changes, sometimes in quite drastic ways... and as changing genders is now part of the established canon, this was an inevitable development (on a note, I don't necessarily see the 14th Doctor being female, but it's quite possible the 15th might be, it probably won't fall into a male-female-male-female pattern, but a random one dictated by whoever happens to be the best contender, regardless of their gender). I'm heartbroken by the response from some of my fellow Whovians... especially after having seen the Ghosthead community split so badly, and I'm concerned about Jodie and Chris getting the blame for the show underperforming when the fault lay more with the outgoing showrunner.

DarkSpectre wrote:Anyone seen Cassidy?

Not that I try to spend much time thinking about him, but maybe this news will be the final blow to make him burst a nerve and have an aneurism.

Coover5 wrote:For me what killed the show was recasting the first Doctor.

I'm trying to wrap my head around this comment... why are you unhappy with Bradley portraying the first Doctor? He was brilliant in An Adventure in Space and Time, and he's not the first actor to take over the role of the first Doctor after William Hartnell passed away, there was Richard Hurndall in 1983's The Five Doctors, who gave a commendable performance... it wasn't absolutely perfect, but it feel within acceptable tolerances.

Coover5 wrote:But now to bring the first Doctor back to use him as they please is terrible.

For all we know he might have been brought back to fill a pivotal role, maybe even help user in a new nu-who era that falls more in keeping with classic Who? Doctor Who does have the rare privilege of actually being able to travel back to the beginning in a way if it so wished.

Moffat did a lot of bad for the show, but he's gone now. Chris Chibnall may well be a breath of fresh air that the show has been needing, someone who helps ground it better, presents better stories and treats the old stories with greater reverence and less convenience than recent showrunners.

If it helps at all, guys, if you think Ghostbusters and Dr Who have problems, they are minor compared to what the Muppets are going through right now; they are literally falling apart. Last few projects bombed embarrassingly. Disney firing Kermit's performer. He claims he's been trying to protect the integrity of the character. Then out of nowhere one of Jim Henson's kids apparently said, eh, I never liked your Kermit anyway and you're lying when you say my father left him to you! Yiiikes....Talk about your throw downs...

"You forgot the first rule of fanatics. When you become obsessed with the enemy...you become the enemy."

Alphagaia wrote:We are starting to arrive to a point where the drama surrounding your shows decides if people will like it.

You're right, and it is ridiculous. Fans have to get a grip and understand drama behind the scenes isn't anything new, even with movies and TV shows they love. It doesn't take away from the quality of the product. It just means the product was created by imperfect human beings who are all just trying to get by in life.

One time on new Doctor Who, they featured a blowjob reference with a character that had been transformed into a tile with just a face. This episode's monster was designed by a child in a contest on another long-running children's show.

I've got another question for Kingpin or another Doctor Who fan--is the Doctor the same character in each series? Or do the names and details change and the only thing they have in common is being time traveling doctors?

Sav C wrote:I've got another question for Kingpin or another Doctor Who fan--is the Doctor the same character in each series? Or do the names and details change and the only thing they have in common is being time traveling doctors?

Same guy.

He had some (maybe 13) biological children and at least one grandchild. He may have been married several times.

Alphagaia wrote:I’ve read and been told (by visitors) time and time again that they believe the actual sexism geared towards ATC was only around 10%, with the majority of fans instead angry with the film being reboot or they didn’t like one particular actress. I’d love to believe that, I REALLY would, but from my experience, I’d venture to say it actually hovers around 25-35%, with another 5-10% in denial.

Yes you are going to take flak for this because this people you're naming and shaming offer valid points. Instead all I see is endless left wing fans with their own selfish needs cry sexism instead of actually think outside of their box.

Alphagaia wrote:While GB:ATC has enough legitimate reasons to dislike it's premise, especially after seeing it, I think the main takeaway from the article is how people underestimated/downplayed the shear initial amount of mysoginist backlash.

What I take from it is refusal by certain people to understand how OTT PC this is. Sure it was made like canon last year the Doctor can become female but this whole idea feels like forcing diversity just to win brownie points. It's not a win for women in any way. In fact it a cheap way to become progressive.

Coover5 wrote:I don't think this gives any insight. When photos came out for Eccleston's Doctor people complain that the new show was going to be too dark and intense.

This doesn't give any insight apart from naming and shaming those with valid opinions. You'll find pretty much the most vocal people are the 10th Doctor fans who always wish Tennant was brought back. They compare every Doctor to Tennant. It is annoying.

JurorNo.2 wrote:I don't know much about the show, but from what everyone tells me, Doctor Who is about being open minded, about variability. It's interesting that so many of its fans aren't taking those lessons to heart.

Yet the people who desperately want progression are the ones lashing out at me for airing my opposite views. These feminists, left wing fans, SJWs whatever don't deserve a female Doctor with their behaviour. And it's always the 'white male losers' that get the blame.

JurorNo.2 wrote:You're right, and it is ridiculous. Fans have to get a grip and understand drama behind the scenes isn't anything new, even with movies and TV shows they love. It doesn't take away from the quality of the product. It just means the product was created by imperfect human beings who are all just trying to get by in life.

People wouldn't be criticising what was going on behind the scenes if those in power showed some responsibility. It's like child having to look after the parents because the adults are unreliable.

DarkSpectre wrote:Depends on which audience you talk to, FOS. There are alot of new GB fans that exclusively like the reboot and had no interest in the franchise before that who feel like the reboot is better. Same thing is happening in Doctor Who. You have either strictly Nu-Who fans or casual more feminist leaning fans who herald this as the greatest thing ever who may or may not even stick around for the long haul vs long time fans who just want a quality show, understand the 54 year old lore and are worried that the casting will derail the show further. I personally am walking after the Christmas episode. It will end 10 years of the revival series and the 12th Doctor's arc for me. And I don't want to watch the show die a slow death if things go south this season.

I find with the Doctor Who decision is that the people it really interests is the left wing feminists and SJWs...for about five seconds. I mean even Anita Sarkeesian is still complaining. Now unlike some people I will continue watching the show because it's DW, I'd watch it probably even it was absolute crap but I'd watch it.

Kingpin wrote:Moffat did a lot of bad for the show, but he's gone now. Chris Chibnall may well be a breath of fresh air that the show has been needing, someone who helps ground it better, presents better stories and treats the old stories with greater reverence and less convenience than recent showrunners.

I have never been overwhelmed by Chibnall's writing. I'm sure he'll cram every episode in with sexist jibes towards men. They're already doing that with Capaldi.

featofstrength wrote:One time on new Doctor Who, they featured a blowjob reference with a character that had been transformed into a tile with just a face. This episode's monster was designed by a child in a contest on another long-running children's show.

And it was written by head producer/head writer Russell T. Davies so it must be good right?

JurorNo.2 wrote:Lol, I guess I can understand the temptation from a joke writing standpoint.

Oooooh you really don't. Imagine tuning in to watch a budget episode of Doctor Who featuring the above fat monster played by Peter Kay who turns random guy's nerdy girlfriend in a slab of concrete so he can perform bjs on. This is a kids show right? Imagine if that episode was written by the friggin guy in charge of New Doctor Who! No doubt it's seen as one of the worst episodes ever.

Sav C wrote:I've got another question for Kingpin or another Doctor Who fan--is the Doctor the same character in each series? Or do the names and details change and the only thing they have in common is being time traveling doctors?

His name is Gary and sometimes he likes to be called Mr Who.

Coover5 wrote:That's how I feel. What happened to Doctor Who is now happening to DC shows on CW and Fox. They are being turned into teen dramas with unnecessary romance stories. It all started after Harry Potter got so big. They all want to fight for that tween audience.

Go back further, Buffy has a lot to answer for.

Last edited by pferreira1983 on July 30th, 2017, 5:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Sav C wrote:I've got another question for Kingpin or another Doctor Who fan--is the Doctor the same character in each series? Or do the names and details change and the only thing they have in common is being time traveling doctors?